In the design of bridge arguments what considerations should be made to select the orientation of the wing walls?

thanks for the invitation

I agree with the answer colleague Eng / hisham abu dagga

There are three common arrangements of wing walls in bridge abutments based on Dr. Edmund C Hambly (1979):

(i) Wing walls parallel to abutments This is the simplest and shortest time to build but is not the most economical design. This design has the advantage that it has least disturbance to existing slope embankment.

(ii) Wing walls at an angle to abutments This is the most economical design among the three options in terms of material cost.

(iii) Wing walls perpendicular to abutments Though it is not the most economical design, the wing walls provide a continuous alignment with bridge decks which provide supports to parapets.

However, they cause disturbances to adjacent structures and utility services during construction. Moreover, if the bridge is curved, the wing walls may hinder the road curvature.

One the other hand, when the wing walls are structurally connected to the abutment, then structural advantage can be taken by the stability of box structure.

I agree with answer of mr. hisham.

Some of the most common arrangements of wing walls in cases of bridge arguments are as follows: > Wing walls parallel to abutments: This method is considered to take least amount of time to build and is simple as well. But on the downside this method is not the most economical. The advantage of this type of design being that they cause the least amount of disturbance to the slope embankment. > Wing walls at an angle to abutments: This design method is considered to be the most economical in terms of material cost. > Wing walls perpendicular to abutments: The characteristic of this design is it provides an alignment continuous with the bridge decks lending a support to the parapets.